Video clips of the panel can now be viewed online. You will need RealPlayer to view these clips. Welcome comments from Jay McGraw, Group Publisher. Introduction by Robert Ivy, FAIA, editor in chief. Robert Ivy presents the nine plan proposals (see additional coverage here). Panel discussion part 1. Panel discussion part 2. Panel discussion part 3.

The architects were thoughtful and cordial, almost surprisingly so, in the first public discussion of the latest round of proposals for the World Trade Center site. Architectural Record, published by McGraw-Hill Construction, presented the event Tuesday evening in a packed McGraw-Hill Auditorium in New York. Architects representing five of the seven teams were present in the front row. The only absentees were from the European-based teams of Daniel Libeskind and Norman Foster. (For photos of the event click here.)

Robert Ivy, FAIA, editor in chief of Architectural Record, moderated the discussion, entitled Waiting for Ground Zero. Event sponsors were Bentley Systems, Artemide, and Turner Construction.

Panelists were Paul Goldberger, architecture critic for The New Yorker; Richard Kahan, the president of Urban Assembly and Take the Field; Bernard Tschumi, dean of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation at Columbia University; and Craig Whitaker, an architect and planner.

Ivy began by asking the panelists if they could define the value of the design charette in which the seven teams produced their schemes for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation (LMDC) in less than two months and presented them on December 18.

"There’s no question this has raised the ante of architectural dialogue in the city," Goldberger said. Although, "what continues to trouble me most is that not all that much has really changed although much has changed on the surface. Architecture became more of a real political priority in the last six months. The ground is shifting in an historic way."

Goldberger, borrowing from James Carville’s line "It’s the economy, stupid" from Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign, said, "It’s the program, stupid." He contended that the program for the site as defined by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has changed little since the initial plans by Beyer Blinder Belle were roundly criticized in July. "The event at the Javits Center was a historic turning point in the history of planning," he said.

Tschumi lauded the quality of the schemes completed under difficult circumstances and great pressure. Some of the "plans had the surgical precision of the attack itself," he said. "The question is how these schemes can be converted, transposed, and translated into precise solutions."

"I think it’s strange and wonderful at the same time," Kahan said of the process thus far and the latest round of proposals. "I reject the idea that any of this is infeasible. It’s absolutely doable."

Then, with tongue firmly in cheek, Kahan dryly said, "There’s two minor impediments. There’s no program and no client." Kahan agreed with Goldberger that a clear program should be defined, and that the program should include a wider range of uses than what the Port Authority currently proposes.

Kahan contended that the two entities leading the charge to rebuild, the Port Authority and developer Larry Silverstein, "have no right to do this (development) for the New York public." He said the situation is "correctable" and he conceived a scenario where Silverstein profits but ultimately does not develop the site, and the city could take on a larger role. To build under a cohesive vision, he said the site would need a patron but "I’m not sure that entity exists today," he said.

Whitaker said he was wary of the "orgy of public participation. I think the public is going to be exhausted, perhaps." He warned that the public might grow tired of the process if it is drawn out too long. He was also concerned that the level of public debate is fixated on the need to balance remembrance with commercialism.

Ivy asked Goldberger if he wanted to name any favorites among the schemes. Goldberger declined to name one favorite, but he said he was taken with the World Cultural Center scheme by the Think team that proposes two lattice towers. "I’m very moved and excited by that scheme," Goldberger said.

Tschumi said the design by United Architects shows the possibilities for "the city of tomorrow to some degree." The design by Richard Meier’s team is "rigorous, iconic, and monumental. The play of solids and voids may be a way to look at the three-dimensional city of tomorrow." The design by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM) doesn’t push the boundaries far enough for Tschumi, and he said it gets "zero for effort."

The architects were allowed to speak in the final segment of the program, and they did not enter into a contentious debate, as some had expected that they would. Instead they spoke about the designs in general terms, often not referring to their own schemes at all.

Peter Eisenman, who worked with Meier on a scheme, made some specific points: calling on the press to show plans rather than simply the photomontage images or models, New York is a force and this discussion of architecture is great for the city, and "it’s a site for architects. Architects are poets for the city. We give the city something that people feel," he said.

Barbara Littenberg of Peterson/Littenberg Architecture and Urban Design, said she was concerned that the evening’s comments, especially those from other architects, were almost too "warm and fuzzy." She warned that the architects should not make mistakes of the past in terms of scale and monumentality, and hoped that whatever is built does not inappropriately "exhibit money, arrogance or inappropriateness."

Jesse Reiser of the United Architects team said the United design, and whatever will be built on the site, "must look at new models of urbanity and must look at technologies that are possible and what they mean for building into the future."

Chicago artist Inigo Manglano-Ovalle, who was a part of the team led by SOM, agreed with Kahan that the control of the property must change for innovative development to occur. "The land must be released from the kings and given back to the people," he said.

Robert Yaro, executive director of the Regional Plan Association, called on the LMDC and Port Authority to again hold a Listening to the City event similar to the one that more than 4,000 people attended on July 20 that Goldberger believes was instrumental in changing the course of the process. Yaro also agreed with Goldberger that, "the program needs to be redefined. The program has been ignored. There may be a need to change the client to change the program."

John E. Czarnecki, Assoc. AIA